Michigan Antlerless Tags

[Mojostick]

The over the counter tags and applications for "lottery" DMU's don't go on sale until July 15, but the quota's are basically set and the NRC/DNR is merely awaiting formal approval.

Below is the link to the quota list. If the numbers will have any bearing on where you hunt or what area you'll get antlerless tags for, take a look. It looks like quota reductions mostly across the board. An exception is the NWLP Antler Restriction Zone, where the goal is to achieve a more balanced antlered buck to doe ratio, so some DMU's in the NW13 APR Zone will see an increase in the antlerless quota, status quo quota's or just a slight reduction.

Some SLP units have fairly substantial reductions. I believe EHD hit a few of those counties in a hard way.

For most in the UP, all I can say is I wish you luck and hope you enjoy the solitude. Lots are area's are going to be tough. While unthinkable to some, there is a southbound lane on the Mackinac Bridge and there's some good hunting in the NWLP, if Yoopers could ever bring themselves to drive south to deer hunt. Although I think very few Yoopers would ever accept that option.

The area where my land is saw a decrease from 9400 antlerless tags down to 8100 tags. Hopefully I can still get two of them. It's always nice to get a couple doe's in the freezer. I have a couple "new to me" vintage Kodiak's that need some blood on them and I also have a "new to me" Kimber 84M Select Grade in .257 Roberts, that I was actually planning on sighting in today, but the rain and wind changed that. It's sitting in the hard case by the garage door. Bummer, maybe next week.

Keep in mind, the deer tag structure has changed this year. You can no longer buy two "single" tags. If you want two "regular" tags, you need to buy the Combination Deer Tag. You can still kill two antlerless deer with the Combination Tag, if you're using a bow, anywhere in the state.


If there's an asterisk next to a county name, that means the county is now part of a multi-county DMU and the quota's are towards the bottom of the list.

Here's the list. Remember that the sales period is July 15 to August 15. Don't forget, if you want one.
     http://www.michigan.gov/documents/dnr/09WCO2014_AntlerlessLicenses_Info_Final_456349_7.pdf

[Dave Pagel]

8000 private land tags in the area of my new property.  I am hoping to get a couple also.  With any luck I can get down to Calhoun for a late season doe or two if the new place doesn't pan out.

D.P.

[Mojostick]

Dave, where is the new property again? If "up north", I'd suggest entering the lottery for up north, because there's 26,100 OTC tags in the multi-county DMU that includes Calhoun. Most of the up north DMU's, even if they have several 1000's of tags, will sell out or come close to selling out, so you may get one but there may be very few to no leftovers. For example, in my area, even with 8100 tags, I'm thinking I may be lucky to get one, since it's a 3 county unit and all 3 counties have lots of deer hunters. There's some 35,000 deer hunters in those counties and 8100 "bonus" antlerless tags. Now, half those guys will forget to apply and a large number is "old school" where they never kill anything but bucks, but there's still likely as many applying as there is tags.

[Dave Pagel]

I am in Clare county and I know 2 may be a stretch.  That is why I am hoping the Calhoun option stays open.

D.P.

[Mojostick]

You should be in great shape. Last year Clare had a quota of 8000, but only sold 7541, so over 400 never got sold. Of those 7541 antlerless tags sold, there were 5652 individual buyers, so lots of guys bought at least two tags.

In 2013, Clare had roughly 15,200 deer hunters and you have an antlerless quota of 8900, total, with 8000 being private land. My guess is that you may even be able to get your full 5 antlerless tag limit, if you really want that many or think your land needs that many killed.

[Dave Pagel]

I didn't close on the property until February and the only way I could get to was snowshoes until April.  I have cameras out, but I don't have a good feel for the numbers yet.  My brother and I don't plan on shooting young bucks even though it is in the non-agricultural segment of Clare county.  We realize it could be a few years before we have consistent buck harvests.  That being said I am sure the B/D ratio is skewed and 3-4 does shouldn't hurt me too badly.  

D.P.

[Mojostick]

Clare is a good county to buy hunting land in. No TB, winter kill isn't a big factor, the rural poverty/rampant poaching isn't nearly as bad as other nearby counties and the soils are decent for antler growth.

This is a few years old, but gives a good synopsis of the county...

WORKSHEET FOR ESTABLISHING DEER POPULATION GOALS
DMU 018 (Clare County), 2006-2010

Adjacent DMU(s) used in calculating goal: 026, 037, 067 and 072

2006 - 2010 Goal: 19,400 to 23,600 deer (34/mi2 to 41/mi2)

Estimated 2005 Population: 27,600 deer (48/mi2)
1996 - 2004 goal: 21,900 deer (38/mi2)

DMU Area (in square miles): 576 (444 private; 132 public land)

Arguments for 2006-2010 Goal:

Clare County is 71% forested, 11% cropland, and 15% pasture and idle grassland. Approximately 4% of the land use is urban. The human population density of 14.7 persons per square mile, and is expected to grow by 5% by 2010. Many Clare County
residents are seasonal, as the county ranks 2nd in the state for the number of second homes.
Most of the public lands are located in the northern and western parts of Clare County.
Approximately ¼ of the county is in public ownership (23%) and is mostly forested. The
predominant forest species on state lands are mixed upland aspen, oak and jack pine.
Jack pine represents 20% of the forest cover. Aspen is less prominent in Clare County
compared to Gladwin County, but oak and jack pine compensate for early successional aspen and supports the current distribution and density of deer.

Large, private land holdings are common in Clare County. Many of these parcels are managed for deer. It is common practice for property owners to establish food plots to attract and hold deer on site. Despite liberal private land antlerless deer quotas, townships such as Hatton and Arthur have been slow to reach desired deer densities due
in part to restricted hunter access. The southeastern corner of Clare County has productive agricultural lands where primarily hay, corn, and some soybeans are grown.
Current deer numbers in this portion of the county have not resulted in unmanageable
crop depredation problems by deer.
Winter conditions do not impact on deer in Clare County. Population levels are primarily
influenced by regulated hunting.
TB and CWD have not been detected in deer in Clare County.
Law Enforcement and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management divisions provided input and
concur with the 2006-2010 proposed deer population goal for Arenac County.

Proposed management strategy for moving population toward goal, + or -:

Currently, the deer population in DMU 018 exceeds the recommended goal (i.e. 34-41 deer/mi2 ) based on the SAK population model estimate. However, other indicators of deer abundance (e.g. vehicle deer accidents, crop damage, forest regeneration, public attitudes) do not suggest that the current deer population is above either a habitat or social carrying capacity.
Future antlerless license recommendations will attempt to focus additional harvest pressure on core problem areas, such as Arthur and Hatton townships. This may include liberal private land antlerless quotas and solicited cooperation from individuals and corporate/public agencies with large tracts of private land. DMAPs will continue to be the primary means of addressing hot spots or areas of high deer density where crop damage
is prevalent.
Should additional control measures be necessary to maintain deer at the recommended population level, other management alternatives that may be considered include: reevaluation of DMU boundaries, additional restrictions on deer baiting, reinstatement of the “landowner preference system” for private land antlerless licenses, or implementation of a late private land antlerless season.

Goal relative to land ownership patterns, habitat, and deer distribution:

Public lands are concentrated in the northern portion and along the west side of Clare
County. A considerable portion of this area is managed for jack pine to benefit the endangered Kirtland’s warbler. This cover type (in various age classes) associated with aspen, oak, cherry, blueberry, wintergreen and lowland conifers provides the basic habitat essentials sufficient to support current deer densities. Private land in DMU (018) is generally more productive and sustains more deer.

Goal in relation to adjacent DMUs within Management Unit:
 
Clare County has similar cover types, deer densities, and hunter numbers as Osceola
(DMU 067), Gladwin (DMU 026), Roscommon (DMU 072), and Missaukee (DMU 057)counties. The recommended deer population goals for these DMUs range from 28-45 deer/mi2. Lower population goals for those counties north of DMU 018 reflect harsher winter conditions and disease control issues. Higher deer numbers are recommended for
Osceola County, west of DMU 018. Isabella County (DMU 037) has a more people, a greater proportion of private land, and extensive agriculture; and therefore a lower recommended deer population goal compared to Clare County.
Clare and Gladwin (026) counties have very similar land ownership, cover types, and land use and thus have the same deer population goals (34-41 deer/mi2).

[kill shot]

Last year in DMU 071 you could use a tag for either bucks or antlerless deer. At our lodge we have a very significant amount of does. The buck to doe ratio is way out of balance. I'm hoping to get a bunch of bowhunters there to reduce the abundance of does. The area is in Presque Isle county by the town of Millersburg.

[Zradix]

JEEZ...for north half of muskegon,Newago, & oceana only 100 combined public permits for all 3 counties..wow

[Mojostick]

Zradix,
Newaygo offered a low number of public land tags in 2013, but I believe that Newaygo didn't have any "bonus" public land antlerless tags since like the late 1990's. I looked back as far as 2002 and Newaygo was private land only. From selling tags and buying them myself, my memory from those days of dealing with the biologist was when Newaygo went from unlimited to I believe 14,000, it went private land only. The deer on public land in that area has never had a problem being controlled by hunting, due to the high hunting pressure.

You can still use both combo tags on antlerless deer, on public land, with a bow. In truth, in that area, the public land probably can't support public land deer hunters taking more than 2 deer a year off of it.

[Zradix]

you could be right about the land supporting the hunters.

I'm sure the amount of additional crossbow hunters out there will increase the amount of does taken during bow seasons as well.

[Mojostick]

Actually, it was only after crossbows became legal that some public land tags were offered again in Newaygo. The NWLP, even with crossbows, still has fewer "archery" deer hunters than in the early 2000's and substantially fewer than in the late 1990's.

If anything, the "tools" that take the antlerless deer on Newaygo public land, as far as antlerless harvest, is the bait pile, the treestand and the guy with the 40 yard compound. If a guy wants to kill a doe, or a fawn, if he drops a bag of carrots, hangs a stand and has a decent compound bow, he won't have much problem killing one on public land, if he puts in a little time and stays smart to the wind. So, there's no need for "bonus" antlerless tags on heavily hunted public land. Unfortunately, it's also the same reason that yearling buck harvest can surpass 70% on "southern" public land. Yearling bucks often stumble into a bait pile about like a fawn will do.

The UP and the northern NLP doesn't have the same issues as the public land south of M-55 has, due to proximity to large populations that can drive there in 2 hours.

The other thing to consider in places like Newaygo is the higher percentage of people who buy antlerless tags and fill them to DMU's where guys buy an antlerless tag but do not fill them. In Newaygo and similar area's, a public hunter lucky enough to be successful in the antlerless lottery is more likely to fill it than the private land guy with lots of OTC antlerless tags. Public land rifle hunters who got an antlerless tag will often shoot the first deer they see, because they can put any tag on it, in case that deer happens to be an antlered buck, upon ground check.

The biggest problem is still the dichotomy in the deer habitat quality/pressure between most northern private land vs public land. Most private land is better managed, some of it is working farmland and hunter numbers are controlled. For much of the public land around my land, nobody wanted it because it was such poor quality soil, so the feds picked it up. The Manistee National Forest was created during the Great Depression. It was unsellable vacant land and the CCC planted lots of the row pines that have since became very low quality wildlife forests. There are good public parcels, but you have to do the research to find when they were recently cut.

I know most public land hunters might recoil at the thought, but I've always thought that a better way to manage public land in the heavily hunted south, like from say M-55 south, would to spread out hunting pressure by an access lottery permit system, a little like we do with spreading out turkey tags. As it is now, guys jam in public land in more "prime times" and often public land is quiet in more "off times". You could use a point system too. So, the coveted Nov.14-16 dates may "cost" 10 points, but a week in early October or December in only use 1 point. Hunters could earn points with each license purchased. That's just a random thought, but controlled pressure would increase all public land hunters experience and even success. The DNR does similar access permits for waterfowl hunting on some state game area's and it works really well. For this same reason, I believe archery season south of M-55 could run to Feb. 1, to offer hunters solitude, more days to bow hunt, but with miniscule impact on the resource. Just a side thought.

[Bonebuster]

I agree with the thought of SOMEHOW controlling hunting pressure in the southern areas.

I have spent the last two summers ground pounding the southern public lands, only to find that when season opens, the hunter numbers resemble a cartoon. I literally saw instances where "bow hunters" were in their treestands looking at each other....LITERALLY looking at each other.

It was a lesson for me and unfortunately a lot of wasted time, money and effort...all three of which are treasured and limited.

We have been feeding the ticks in our scouting across the southern areas again this summer and I can tell you...deer numbers are down from last year...

Thanks for posting the info...

[Mojostick]

Bonebuster,

I'm just thinking out loud here, but think of a couple aspects that seemingly give some hunters the feeling of "ownership" of an area of public land. There's tree stand's and bait.

I think that a couple minor tweaks could really help public land conflicts. What if you had to remove any stand after each hunt? That would cause most guys to use climbers and then you'd get away from guys that try to "claim" an area by hanging stands and leaving them up all year. It's public land and leaving a hung stand is a kin to littering, especially if left there past the open season. Nobody should be able to claim an area on public land by leaving a stand as a "marker". It's like some river fishing guides trying to claim a bend by leaving their boat there and still trying to claim the gravel they're actually fishing, 100 yards downstream. That's BS too.

The other aspect is baiting. Guys get territorial about their bait piles. If baiting wasn't allowed on public land, then you remove that major conflict flash point.

After talking to the top Ohio deer biologist, I still believe that we Michigan bow hunters should push to extend archery season into January or even Feb, just like Ohio does, as it has basically zero impact on the resource, yet offers lots more hunting opportunity. In those late seasons, only the most die hard types remain and the percentage of yearling deer harvest is low single digits. We used to have December for bow hunting, but muzzleloader's and late firearms seasons have ruined that quiet, in many area's.

I'm not talking about a late season for the UP, because the migration/yards is totally different up there. And I'm not talking about the snowbelts in the northern 1/3 of the LP. But using M-55 or US-10 again, everything south of that line could easily support a small number of bow hunters enjoying a late January/early Feb. hunt, if you get a nice, warm, 20 plus degree day. And that's all who'd be out there, the rabid 5% of bow hunters who'd rather be bow hunting on football playoff weekends or Super Bowl Sunday, than watching TV or watching a hole in the ice.

Again, not looking to ruffle feathers, just thinking out loud on how to lower conflicts and expand opportunity.

[Rathbuck]

Thanks for posting this - very interesting.  With the hard winter up north and EHD hitting elsewhere in the state, I'm not surprised they reduced the number of tags.

Looking forward to the season already.

[kill shot]

Mojostick, thanks for thinking out loud. You have brought up a valid point about public land ownership. I hunted a spot in the U.P. by the Fence river that had a bunch of clearings where hunters would camp. We were bear hunting in september and forgot to get a camping permit. The guy who owned a nearby lodge said to take a permit off one of "there" camping spots to use. To find out the guy gets a stack of permits and posts them in the camping areas about a week before the gun season opens. So it seems as though they own the state land all along the fence river road.

[Mojostick]

Dave,
For you and anyone else in Clare and the surrounding counties, take the time to read this and make sure you give your input. Non-hunters and the old growth forest anti-timbering types will certainly give their input. Even if you don't hunt state land, the habitat on the state land can impact the herd for some distance around it.
Keep in mind, game animals like deer, turkey, grouse, woodcock, and rabbits thrive in younger forests vs. older forests and the edge created by timbering.

DNR invites public input on forest plans for Arenac, Clare, Gladwin and Midland counties
 http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/MIDNR/bulletins/bf8de7

[BOWMARKS]

Dave
I'm sure you and your brother will be able to connect on a couple doe,thats what those autumn orange shafts were meant for.    

MARK

[Dave Pagel]

Thank Mojo,

They aren't doing anything near me it appears.

D.P.